Theorizing a More Complete Picture: Integrating Interpersonal Communication with Computer-Mediated Communication

Abstract

As the title of this journal makes explicit, taking the study of human communication and technology seriously requires a sophisticated consideration of both human communication and technology. Scholars in psychology, sociology, computer science, and media studies produce interesting lines of research on communication technology; however, researchers who study interpersonal interactions have a firm understanding of the process of communication, including its message-based and relational dynamics. How people interact, communicate, and relate transcends differences in channels. Rather than focusing explicitly on technology, which changes over time due to both technological advancements and social whimsy, research on social interactions and myriad interpersonal processes is well-suited to advance research on technologically-mediated communication. In a world of rapidly changing technology, communication is constant. Modern relationships utilize a variety of channels throughout the day to both enact novel behaviors and perform traditional behaviors in new ways (Caughlin, Basinger, & Sharabi, 2013; Sundar, Jia, Waddell, & Huang, 2015). Unfortunately, theorizing on the integration of human communication and technology has occurred in a piecemeal fashion. Despite a wealth of research that studies interper-sonal and social interactions online, there are few models or theories that embrace the richness in both human communication and technology. There exists, then, a need to synthesize research on interpersonal communication and technology to provide a more complete understanding of how, when, and why technology changes processes and outcomes of interpersonal communication. Human Communication & Technology can be a place that welcomes that research In recognizing the complexities of supportive interactions, Burleson (2009) asserted that the outcomes of these interactions are based on aspects of the sender of a message, the receiver of a message, the message itself, and the context of the interaction. He continued to note that "it appears that many (and perhaps most) of these factors operate in concert with each another-combining, qualifying, and moderating each other's influence" (p. 27). Although Burleson focused on supportive interactions, his observation holds for most interpersonal exchanges. The